
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Oncol.
Sec. Thoracic Oncology
Volume 15 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1566666
This article is part of the Research TopicInnovations in Biomarker-Based Lung Cancer ScreeningView all 5 articles
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is a valuable technique for ensuring the adequacy of specimens during bronchoscopic biopsy; however, its diagnostic utility in lung cancer pathological classification has yet to be comprehensively assessed. Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of ROSE in lung cancer and its accuracy in classifying lung cancer pathological types. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 510 consecutive patients who underwent bronchoscopic biopsy with concurrent ROSE between March and July 2023. ROSE diagnoses were compared with the final pathological diagnoses to access concordance. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate concordance across cancer subtypes, lesion locations, and patient demographics. The diagnostic accuracy of ROSE in classifying lung cancer subtypes-specifically small cell lung cancer (SCLC), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and adenocarcinoma (AC)-was systematically evaluated. Results: Overall concordance between ROSE and the final pathological diagnoses was 93.92% (479/510), with near-perfect agreement ( = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.83-0.92). The accuracy of ROSE in distinguishing malignant from benign lesions was significantly lower in central lesions (89.05%) compared to peripheral lesions (95.66%; p = 0.010), and in AC (89.91%) versus SCC (100%; p = 0.0027). ROSE showed high accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) for distinguishing SCLC (95.32%, 87.50%, 97.30%, 96.86%, and 89.09%) and NSCLC (92.45%, 92.34%, 92.86%, 75.36%, and 98.09%). For SCC and AC, they were 84.91%, 89.32%, 80.73%, 88.89%, and 81.42% vs 79.72%, 69.72%, 90.29%, 73.81%, and 88.37%, respectively. Conclusion: ROSE effectively differentiates benign from malignant lesions and accurately classifies SCLC and NSCLC during bronchoscopic biopsy. While useful for preliminary subtyping of SCC and AC, its reduced sensitivity for AC and challenges in central lesion evaluation limit its utility as a standalone diagnostic tool. ROSE remains critical for optimizing biopsy workflows and reducing repeat procedures.
Keywords: Rapid on-site evaluation, lung cancer, Bronchoscopic biopsy, pathological typing, Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration
Received: 25 Jan 2025; Accepted: 14 Apr 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Yan, Jiang, Gong, Pan and Jin. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Faguang Jin, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi'an, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary Material
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.